PDA

View Full Version : 2012 Franchise Tag costs



BlitzburghRockCity
02-18-2012, 12:44 AM
Teams can begin placing the franchise tag on players Feb. 20.

Here are the franchise numbers for 2012:

Quarterback $16.1 million
Running Back $7.7 million
Wide Receiver $9.4 million
Tight End $5.4 million
Offensive Line $9.4 million
Defensive End $10.6 million
Defensive Tackle $7.9 million
Linebacker $8.8 million
Cornerback $10.6 million
Safety $6.2 million

As you can see, the cost to franchise Wallace would be $9.4 million, much too much for the salary cap-strapped Steelers to add to their cap.

But remember, the free agent market at many positions - including wide receiver - is ridiculously deep this year.

In other words, why give up a first-round draft pick to sign Wallace when you can sign DeSean Jackson, Wes Welker, Stevie Johnson, Dwayne Bowe or Marques Colston instead?

Source (http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/sidelines/)

What this writer fails to point out is that they can tag Wallace, should they choose to do so, and then remove the tag and that hefty cap hit from it by getting him signed to a longer deal.

The first round tender off is only about 2.7 million last I checked, and they still have a few weeks yet to get under the cap to offer him that.

Nolrog
02-18-2012, 06:15 AM
There's no way I'd franchise him. Wallace is not a franchise receiver, and as the author points out, the WR FA class is deep, so you wouldn't have to overpay dramatically to keep him.

They should tender him an offer and work out a long term deal. That works best for everyone.

BlitzburghRockCity
02-18-2012, 09:46 AM
There was a time when the Steelers almost never used their franchise tag but with salaries sky rocketing the way they are, and no end in sight, they almost too for some players. For Wallace though, I'm torn on franchising him should it come to that. He has done great things his first 3 years in the league, two 1,000 yd seasons, the first real deep threat the Steelers have had other than Santonio in I don't even know how long, etc. His play did significantly drop off the last half of the season though and while some of that can be attributed to Ben's injuries and the merry go round at offensive line, he got swallowed up in coverage fairly regularly.

I wouldn't be opposed to tagging him if they have to mainly because there's no one else they could justify using the tag on this offseason and I'd like to see those 3 stick together.

Nolrog
02-18-2012, 10:27 AM
wouldn't be opposed to tagging him if they have to mainly because there's no one else they could justify using the tag on this offseason and I'd like to see those 3 stick together.

There's no way I'd franchise him. Wallace is not a top 5 in the NFL receiver. He's very important to the team, no question, but let's not overstate his value and cause problems. If they had a free 10 million dollars they'd be much better off spending it on a top tier guard and solid MILB than on Wallace.

Big T
02-18-2012, 10:39 AM
There's no way I'd franchise him. Wallace is not a top 5 in the NFL receiver. He's very important to the team, no question, but let's not overstate his value and cause problems. If they had a free 10 million dollars they'd be much better off spending it on a top tier guard and solid MILB than on Wallace.

Who says they have to pay him that money? You Franchise tag Wallace, so no other teams can snipe him during negotiations, and you sign him to a long term deal that will have a lot less of a cap hit. Its not a difficult concept and it's a no brainer for me. I guarantee if we tender him, the patriots snag him and we're left with a glorified second round pick. F*ck that ****. Mike Wallace wayyy too important to this team to let him get away. How do you think Antonio Brown will do if he's the number one threat on this team, with no one else being consistently double covered? He won't have anywhere near the impact he had.

Like I said, tagging Wallace then signing him to a long term is is absolutely a no brainer.

Nolrog
02-18-2012, 02:04 PM
Who says they have to pay him that money? You Franchise tag Wallace, so no other teams can snipe him during negotiations, and you sign him to a long term deal that will have a lot less of a cap hit.

Like I said, tagging Wallace then signing him to a long term is is absolutely a no brainer.

Yeah. Like I said:


They should tender him an offer and work out a long term deal. That works best for everyone.

Big T
02-18-2012, 05:12 PM
Yeah. Like I said:

No tender though. We put a first round tender on him and he's gone. It has to be the franchise tag.

Axeman
02-18-2012, 05:15 PM
There was a time when the Steelers almost never used their franchise tag but with salaries sky rocketing the way they are, and no end in sight, they almost too for some players. For Wallace though, I'm torn on franchising him should it come to that. He has done great things his first 3 years in the league, two 1,000 yd seasons, the first real deep threat the Steelers have had other than Santonio in I don't even know how long, etc. His play did significantly drop off the last half of the season though and while some of that can be attributed to Ben's injuries and the merry go round at offensive line, he got swallowed up in coverage fairly regularly.

I wouldn't be opposed to tagging him if they have to mainly because there's no one else they could justify using the tag on this offseason and I'd like to see those 3 stick together.


good point. I did some research from 1991 to 2001 with the exception to Dwight Stone, Louis Lipps and Hines Ward (I just did career to these guys) and here is what I came up with.

Dwight stone

1998 - 1 50+ 1 TD on 11 rec.
1990 - 1 50+ 19 rec.
1991 - 4 50+ 4 TD 32 rec.

Louis Lipps

1984 - 3 50+ 3 TD 45 rec.
1998 - 3 50+ 3 TD 50 rec.
1989 - 4 50+ 3TD 50 rec.

Charles Johnson

1994 - 1 50+ 1 TD 38 rec.
1996 - 2 50+ 2 TD 60 rec.
1998 - 1 50+ 1TD 65 rec.

Yancy Thigpen

1994 - 1 50+ 1 TD 36 rec.
1997 1 50+ 1 TD 15 rec.

Ernie Mills

1995 1 50+ 1 TD 39 rec.

Courtney Hawkins

1998- 1 50+ 66 rec.

Hines Ward

2000-1 50+ 1 TD 48 rec.
2002-2 50+ 2TD 112 rec.
2003-1 50+ 95 rec.
2004-1 50+ 80 rec.
2005-2 50+ 2TD 69 rec.
2006-2 50+ 1 TD 74 rec.
2009-2 50+ 1 TD 95 rec.

tomorrow I will do from 2001 - 2011

BlitzburghRockCity
02-19-2012, 10:27 AM
I remember when they drafted Charles Johnson, he was the best WR to come out of that draft according to the experts. The Steelers were just hoping that someone like Johnnie Morton would fall to them but they ended up being able to get Johnson.

Dwight Hands of Stone, fast as hell but couldn't catch a cold in January..LOL

With Wallace though, if they can swing the franchise tag it would benefit them mainly because if he goes out and tests the market, the price they'd have to match could be higher than what a long term deal is from them exclusively.

Mean Linebacker
02-19-2012, 01:32 PM
I just don't see any way the Rooney's don't find a way to keep Wallace around. They've spent 3 years grooming him, why let him walk away now and give someone else the benefit of your hard work?